Don't buy a FP3 yet if you don't like stock android or Google!

Google will need to stop forcing manufacturers to preinstall Chrome and Google search in order to offer the Google Play Store on handsets. Google will also need to stop preventing phone makers from using forked versions of Android

I’m against monopolies naturally. But I think this is a lot to ask from a company like Google, of course at the end of the day it all depends on the profitability isn’t it, if there’s still a profit why not comply? But the competitive market is not that simple/idealistic and there are too many variables to consider. What would happen if you can no longer “guide” the sheep? Well, they might leave for other currently developing pastures of course.

Well it all depends on the profitability model isn’t it. They could have a model like this: a mediocre android-like os for the pleb companies like Samsung and such that obeys the EU rules… and a gold standard whatever “android” deluxe for their own pixel line of phones and portable devices, a LOT of people already jump on pixel just because google made the camera AI night mode exclusive to pixels. So we already see some steps taken, but where this is going only they know, this is a company that thinks thousands steps ahead and has plans for generations.
With that said, other companies like Apple can do the opposite with their iOS, make an open version and dump it one the market oversaturated with android phones, and cause quite a stir, even I am curious how it would look and feel like.

It’s hard to predict how things will play out and what moves will have to be taken, more so the reason for the AI cold war, where google is leading I think.

Stanzi, meet sarcasm.

Hi sarcasm, I’m Stanzi! :joy:


Some statistical data is gathered, but the sad truth is that no one is spying on you, I know this is very disappointing but no one cares you exist unless you’re a big celebrity or a high clearance secret service agent.

Mass surveillance is a very real thing and affects a large percentage of the world population, regardless of the name of the corporation or government carrying it out.

1 Like

My philosophical view on mass surveillance is very Buddhist, which does not mean I am one. Which is, if you got nothing to hide you got nothing to worry about.
As long as there’s no thought police knocking at my door I’m fine with the government crawling up my asshole with a flashlight…

And yet ironically the thought police these days is not the proverbial government as it was prophesized by Orwell, it’s the media, and the campuses, even your bored neighbour who you think is not there watching you because it is not something you want to think about, it’s us! We’re the thought police, the government and the corporations is just the tip of the iceberg.

To all the ones who “have got nothing to hide”: Please be so kind and ping me your full bank account details (login credentials would be the easiest plus a TAN), the login data of your main e-mail account, oh and your full health history (illnesses, examinations etc.) would also be interesting. Thanks.

P.S.: I am VERY sure that EVERYONE has something to hide.


Google does not track any of your passwords. What for? They only gather statistical data and would be stupid to sell it to anyone, and everybody’s doing it, I’m doing it right now, I think someone would be interested in offering you their VPN services…
The only thing I got to hide is my pornhub history, but let’s be honest no one cares, and if someone would care what’s wrong with them!?

If “you” weren’t interesting, then you wouldn’t be worth any money, and then companies like Facebook and Google couldn’t exist, because they couldn’t generate tons of revenue based on your information.


I’m familiar with Gabriel from a long time ago, I was a ddg user at that time, online privacy is his shtick and I was all about it at that time, I was also much younger and idealistic.
The companies like Facebook and Google generate their cash from the multitude which the individual belongs to, as it should, but not from a particular individual, so the data they gather is statistical, to them it is like “symbols in the matrix” cold and sterile, and not “what Paul ate for dinner last night, he’s so poor”. To them as an individual you have no value, what does have is the synergistic value of the multitude. With that said I’m not defending anyone.
If there is government surveillance and policing offline it is only a matter of time before there would be government surveillance and policing online, all “bubbles” will be under far more scrupulous surveillance than the surveyed space itself.
The struggle for privacy is not the way of the future in my opinion, it’s just yet another cold war, a type of sports for our species, something to occupy ourselves with.

Same principles that apply offline also apply online, the need for personal security is the flip side of insecurity. The more you have it the more you need it.

Why was that comment directed at me?

I also have nothing to hide.

That is to say, I have nothing to hide for the current government of my country.

Who knows what the future will bring? I don’t want my data lying around for some future party I am currently unaware of to exploit. There are plenty of examples of gathering information about people and filing it backfiring in the most horrible way.

My point is, you can’t predict the future, and you might find yourself having to hide something then.


I am getting the feeling that you really do mean what you are writing - frightening. For me personal privacy is a human right - like also described in the linked article above - and human rights are nothing to be discussed or questioned in any way. Do you “need” fundamental human rights? Is this really what we want to discuss?

Just the first example I found searching the net (without g00gle):

PS.: I still haven’t received any personal bank accounts etc. Please proceed.


I didn’t want to pull a Godwin but I do always think of the Holocaust in these types of discussion. The Netherlands kept pretty detailed records of their citizens, including whether they were Jewish, and boy, did that come in handy for the Nazis. Now of course it was never the Dutch’ intention for that information to be used in that way, which is why I think people should be wary, as you never know what is going to happen with your information.

I guess I get away with a Godwin today, because my town is celebrating its liberation 75 years ago this week.


Wisely put.

Think of what happened in Turkey: A former friend of the now-dictator is nowadays considered a rebel, and everyone who once has had even faint contacts to the now-rebel is in danger.

Nobody would have thought it important to distance themselves from the then-friend-now-rebel, but today it’s important that no (digital) traces of any connection exist.

Danke & Grüße von


Forcing people to use proprietary software and give up their freedom is highly unethical. If “Fairphone” wants to enslave their customers like Apple and Google do, don’t expect me to spend money on it.

I disagree on the idea that a company has the right to define the term “fair”. They might call their phone “fair”, but as long as it is not, they are just liars.

Welcome to the community forum.


Sorry, but in my opinion you’ve got a really strange concept of slavery.
And obviously, you are absolutely free to spend your money on whatever phone etc. you like

Just out of curiosity. Would you prefer a phone, that is not “enslaving” you with Android OS but tha is produsced based on enslaving mine-workers in Africa and factory workers in China? I sure do know, where my priorities in this regard are. (Of course you can chose /e/ for the Fairphone already, as @AnotherElk already posted.)

Ok. So, who has the right to define the term “fair”?
Because, unfortunately but also obviously, there is no such thing like a legal definition or common definition, that is widely accepted.

As much as I like your priniples; Fairphone at least is really open about their shortcominigs and what steps they have taken, are taking and still need to take.

Time has taught me, that it is near impossible living the strict principles I so easily could preach.


I think it’s pretty obvious that the term fair in Fairphone was derived from fairtrade and I think it’s petty to interpret it differently and then judge the company by your own, rather far-fetched interpretation. And I agree with BertG, buying this phone is about considering other people and the effect my actions have on their lives. Feel free to buy a phone that enslaves others so you can feel free and enlightened. Your point never held anyway, as it was clear from the start other OSes would eventually be available.